That's not to say the demise of the Fairness Doctrine did not have an
adverse effect. I produced public affairs programming under that rule at
KCBS-TV in Los Angeles,
and found it very workable. I did not have to tell both sides of the story, I
just had to try to do so. I also witnessed how, once it was abolished, TV
programs that covered the local community just disappeared. And on the radio
side, once the Fairness Doctrine went away, there is little question that Rush
Limbaugh went hard right on a national microphone, attacking Democrats and
anyone else who gets in the way of his pro-corporate right wing agenda.
Copycats soon moved in, creating an industry of right wing propagandists. In 90% of
radio programming today, no real debate is allowed (unless a brave or
committed few sneak past the microphone hoarders' screeners.)

In August, 2011, the final nail has been pounded into the coffin of the
Fairness Doctrine.
But there is much to celebrate about Wednesday's rule change. The FCC ruling
shows the agency clearly understands that broadcasters do have an obligation to
"serve the public interest," which is critical. Note the following language in today's official ruling:

"[T]he FCC reasoned that the doctrine imposed substantial burdens on
broadcasters without countervailing benefits. As a result, the FCC concluded
that the doctrine was inconsistent with both the public interest and the
First Amendment principles it was intended to promote.”

So what "Public Interest Obligations" do broadcasters have? In January, 2009, as
noted by Brad Friedman in BradBlog.com, President Obama noted on the White
House Technology page his goal to "clarify the public interest obligations
of broadcasters who occupy the nation's spectrum." But two and a half years
later, neither the President nor the FCC has defined such obligations of
broadcasters.

So now, based in part on the FCC Information
Needs of Communities report which recommends citizen involvement in the
process, there is a new movement for citizens of communities to define their
own public interest obligations and demand them from their local broadcasters.

It starts with the understanding that We the People legally own the frequencies
over which TV and Radio stations broadcast. There are only a few such
frequencies in any given community, and it is their scarcity which makes
broadcasting unique and subject to government oversight. As stated last month in a Third Circuit Court of Appeals
decision,

"We agree with the FCC that the rules do not violate the First
Amendment because they are rationally related to substantial government interests
in promoting competition and protecting viewpoint diversity."

People need to understand that broadcasters only receive licenses to
broadcast IF they "serve the public interest." Those licenses only
come up for renewal once every eight years. It happens that those
licenses are coming up on the radio side on a rotating basis across the country
starting now through July 2014; on the TV side, they come up for renewal
starting September 2012 through July 2015. If stations clearly are not serving
the public interest, those licenses can be legally challenged within that time
frame and should be rescinded, giving new broadcasters opportunities to both
make the big bucks broadcasters do (TV stations are making as much as 46% profit, according to
the most recent report issued by the FCC) and serve the public interest at the
same time.

This is not to say the only way to get broadcasters to serve the public
interest is by filing legal challenges to their licenses. The Sacramento Media
Group, affiliated with Common Cause, has successfully employed a model of knocking on TV stations'
doors, asking for five minutes of daily political coverage on TV during
election season. It took meetings with station management making that request,
monitoring stations' coverage for three election cycles, writing several
reports and releasing them to local newspapers (which caused the stations
considerable embarrassment.) But today, SMG has found success. Their next goal
is to ask local Talk radio stations for balanced political coverage, again during
election seasons.

At the end of the day, the publicly owned airwaves are about public safety,
about community, and about ensuring First Amendment rights for everyone
in the public square of broadcasting. Luckily, the Supreme Court is on our
side. In
Red Lion Broadcasting v FCC, the Supreme Court held that

"the First Amendment is relevant to broadcasting, but it is the right
of the viewer and listener, not the broadcaster, which is paramount."

That's the First Amendment Right of all the viewers and listeners,
not the just ones who listen to the most profitable formats for corporations.

But it is really finding its legs next month with the 2011
Wisconsin Media Reform Tour featuring Broadcast Blues. (Broadcast Blues is the
2009 documentary film I made which delves into issues of Public Interest Obligations
of broadcasters. ) Thanks to the organizing efforts of local folks, I'll be
traveling to eight cities in Wisconsin,
showing the film, then surveying citizens as to their specific public interest
needs. Next, we'll work on how they can approach their local broadcasters, not just
by email, but with personal visits, and convey to the broadcasters what they
need. In some cases, friendly visits will get great results: heck, the manager
of the station could be somebody you went to high school with. But other times,
protests, boycotts, maybe even legal petitions to deny the stations' licenses
may need to be filed.

We'll do whatever it takes to restore the public – all the public –
into the public interest obligations of broadcasters.

But unlike the Fairness Doctrine, this is a bottom up approach. This is
"We the People" holding both broadcasters - and the FCC accountable
to us. We are taking back that which we already own: our public airwaves.

CeaseSPIN.org News Quality Rating System

Top 40 Best Documentaries

About Me

Sue Wilson tells important stories which move politicians to act. She is the Emmy winning director of the media reform documentary "Broadcast Blues" and editor of SueWilsonReports.com.
Broadcast Blues sets its sights on media policy, and www.SueWilsonReports.com turns a critical eye on the media itself.
She recently formed an activist site, http://www.MediaActionCenter.net